DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Continued Examination Under 37 CFR 1.114
A request for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, including the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e), was filed in this application after final rejection. Since this application is eligible for continued examination under 37 CFR 1.114, and the fee set forth in 37 CFR 1.17(e) has been timely paid, the finality of the previous Office action has been withdrawn pursuant to 37 CFR 1.114. Applicant's submission filed on September 17, 2026 has been entered.
Claim Objections
Claim 26 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specifically, regarding claim 26 the use of the terms “ergonomically sound posture” and “ergonomically poor posture” recited in sixteenth thru seventeenth lines of the claim render the claim indefinite. In particular, the terms “ergonomically sound posture” and “ergonomically poor posture” are relative terms and therefore render the claim indefinite. Moreover, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. Accordingly, any claims dependent on claim 26 are objected to based on same above reasoning.
Claim 30 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specifically, regarding claim 30 the use of the term “ergonomically sound posture” recited in second thru third lines of the claim render the claim indefinite. In particular, the term “ergonomically sound posture” is a relative term and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Moreover, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 31 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specifically, regarding claim 31 the use of the term “ergonomically poor posture” recited in second thru third lines of the claim render the claim indefinite. In particular, the term “ergonomically poor posture” is a relative term and therefore renders the claim indefinite. Moreover, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 47 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specifically, regarding claim 26 the use of the terms “ergonomically sound posture” and “ergonomically poor posture” recited in eleventh thru twelfth lines of the claim render the claim indefinite. In particular, the terms “ergonomically sound posture” and “ergonomically poor posture” are relative terms and therefore render the claim indefinite. Moreover, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim 48 is objected to because of the following informalities:
Specifically, regarding claim 26 the use of the terms “ergonomically sound posture” and “ergonomically poor posture” recited in tenth thru eleventh lines of the claim render the claim indefinite. In particular, the terms “ergonomically sound posture” and “ergonomically poor posture” are relative terms and therefore render the claim indefinite. Moreover, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and thus one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102 of this title, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 26-28, 30-31, 33, 36, 38, 40-43, and 46-48 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creager et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2017/0153812 A1 (hereinafter Creager), in view of Bozzini et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2015/0293694 A1 (hereinafter Bozzini).
Regarding claim 26, Creager teaches a control device comprising: interface circuitry operatively coupling the control device with a user interface device that includes a projection module configured to project a virtual input device (101, 200, and 209; 100 FIGS. 1-2, paragraph[0020] of Creager teaches FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a virtual input computing system (200) for processing data obtained from the virtual keyboard (100) of FIG. 1, according to one example of the principles described herein; the virtual input computing system (200) may be incorporated into the pad (101) of the virtual keyboard (100), may be a coupled to the virtual keyboard (100), may be a standalone computing device, or may be incorporated into a computing device to which, the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled; and in the example where the virtual input computing system (200) is incorporated into a computing device to which the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled, the various computing elements and resources provided by the virtual input computing system (200) may be part of the computing device, and the modules comprising executable program code used in the implementation of the virtual keyboard (100) and its associated functions may be stored within a data storage device of the computing device, and See also at least paragraphs[0028]-[0036], [0042]-[0043], [0048]-[0050], and [0061] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a pad that includes a virtual input computing system for processing data obtained from a virtual keyboard, and to orient keys and display keystrokes associated with hand movements of a user, wherein the virtual input computing system connects the pad to a display device that uses a projection system to project an image of a keyboard on the pad)) and a sensor configured to obtain posture information indicating a posture of a user while the user interacts with the virtual input device; and processing circuitry configured to: determine whether the posture of the user satisfies an ergonomic criterion by determining whether a deviation between the posture of the user and a predefined posture model represented in reference ergonomic data falls within an acceptable range associated with the predefined posture model, wherein the predefined posture model represents an ergonomically sound posture or an ergonomically poor posture; and in response to determining that the posture of the user fails to satisfy the ergonomic criterion, (102, 201 FIGS. 1-2, and 5, paragraph[0059] of Creager teaches the method (500) of FIG. 5 may continue by the processor (201) executing the security module (240) to determine (block 503) if the initial hand characteristics match a number of hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity such as the keystroke identity defined and stored at blocks 303 and 304 of FIG. 3; in one example, the initial hand characteristics may be compared to the keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into the computing device; in this example, a user who is authorized to access the computer, but is not the current user of the computer may still be denied access; in another example, the processor (201) may compare the initial hand characteristics to the keystroke identity of a number of users; if the initial hand characteristics match hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity (block 503, determination YES), then access to the computing device may be allowed; the method (500) may loop back to block 501 to ensure that every time a user's hands are detected, that this security measure may be performed; the hand characteristics compared at block 503 may include, hand movements, hand sizes, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, tissue density of the user's hands and fingers (110), palm prints, fingerprints, among many other characteristics of the user's hands and fingers as detected by the sensing devices (102), or combinations thereof, and See also at least paragraphs[0013]-[0014], [0020], [0022], [0036], [0038], [0044], [0048], [0050], [0058], [0060], and [0063]-[0064] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a processor for executing a module to determine characteristics of hand, wherein the hand characteristics include at least hand movements, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, wherein the virtual keyboard is calibrated while demonstrating keystrokes on the virtual keyboard, wherein determining the hand posturing from outset of the user using the virtual keyboard within a detection range is based on detection by sensing devices detecting interaction by the user, and wherein processor determines whether hand characteristics match or does not match a stored keystroke identity, for increasing comfort and utility, by comparing initial hand characteristic to a keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into a computing device connected to the virtual keyboard)); but does not expressly teach reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion.
However, Bozzini teaches reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Furthermore, Creager and Bozzini are considered to be analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to a keyboard, and forming a keyboard that is a virtual keyboard suitable for a particular user. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Creager based on Bozzini to reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion. One reason for the modification as taught by Bozzini is to have an apparatus for presenting a virtual keyboard with some keys partially or fully extend beyond the screen, dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard to a particular typing habits of a user, and allowing a user to customize a keyboard layout including adding/deleting keys and changing key positions (paragraph[0002] of Bozzini). The same motivation and rationale to combine for claim 26 mentioned above applies to all corresponding dependent claims mentioned in corresponding statement of grounds of rejection.
Regarding claim 27, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to generate a user model defining a digital twin of the user based at least in part on the posture information, and wherein the processing circuitry determines whether the posture of the user satisfies the ergonomic criterion by comparing the digital twin to the predefined posture model (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs[0010], [0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is built by the processor and is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Regarding claim 28, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 27, wherein the digital twin represents any of: arms, hands, legs, feet, neck, head and torso of the user, or any combination thereof, with relative dimensions extracted from a digital representation of the user (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists based on the detected signature then the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature, and wherein the processor detects, records and stores relative position and sizes of fingers as a signature for future reference)).
Regarding claim 30, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the predefined posture model represents the ergonomically sound posture, wherein the ergonomic criterion specifies a maximum permissible deviation from the ergonomically sound posture, and wherein reconfiguring the virtual input device promotes reduction of the deviation below the maximum permissible deviation during subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs [0013]-[0014], [0020], [0022], [0036], [0038], [0044], [0048], [0050], [0058], [0060], and [0063]-[0064], [0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction limit boundary of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists based on the detected signature then the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature, and wherein the processor detects, and records relative position and sizes of fingers as a signature for future reference)).
Regarding claim 31, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the predefined posture model represents the ergonomically poor posture, wherein the ergonomic criterion specifies a minimum required deviation from the ergonomically poor posture, and wherein reconfiguring the virtual input device promotes an increase of the deviation beyond the minimum required deviation during subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs [0013]-[0014], [0020], [0022], [0036], [0038], [0044], [0048], [0050], [0058], [0060], and [0063]-[0064], [0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction limit boundary of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists based on the detected signature then the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature, and wherein the processor detects, and records relative position and sizes of fingers as a signature for future reference)).
Regarding claim 33, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the posture information from the sensor comprises aggregated information obtained by tracking the interaction of the user with the virtual input device over time (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0090] of Bozzini teaches the processor 20 automatically detects this variation and evaluates the region in which the keyboard should be receptive for each key; the processor 20 in effect adapts the individual keys to the user habits in respect of position, size and shape while a user hitting the keys to reduce the error rate of typing by a user on a virtual keyboard; the adaptation can take place all the time when the keyboard is in use or only during a learning phase of the system; however, the adaptation is preferably linked to a given user, so that each user has his/her personal parameter set that is loaded initially and then adjusted depending on the current setting of the adaptation; this set of parameters can be selected either by an input (user identification, signature, etc.) of a user or by recognizing the typical finger position; and the user may also signal the processor 20 to store the newly adapted virtual keyboard as the corresponding virtual keyboard for the signature, and See also at least paragraphs[0059], [0071]-[0082], [0087]-[0089], and [0091]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches sensed every time the user contacts a sensing layer that can even extend beyond the screen of a display, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists based on the detected signature then the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature, and wherein the processor detects, records and stores relative position and sizes of fingers as a signature for future reference)).
Regarding claim 36, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to constrain the reconfiguring of the virtual input device according to a physical environment in which the virtual input device is deployed (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-24, paragraph[0064] of Bozzini teaches FIG. 4 shows an exemplary virtual keyboard 410 on the display 120, in which the sensing layer 320 having touch-sensitive elements extends beyond the area of the screen 310; the second portion of touch-sensitive elements is arranged to be consecutive to the bottom edge of the screen 310 and to the first portion of the touch-sensitive elements; in this example, the spacebar and its horizontal neighbors are only displayed partially (upper portion on the screen 310 and on the first portion of the touch-sensitive elements, lower portion outside of the screen 310 and on the second portion of the touch-sensitive elements) such that their positions are easier to find visually; the second portion of the touch-sensitive elements may exist in any of all sides of the screen 310; for example, if the virtual keyboard 410 is moved to the top, the row of the number keys can be partially displayed; and similarly, the keys on the right or left side can be partially displayed if touch-sensitive area is also extended in that side, and See also at least paragraphs[0047]-[0054], [0058]-[0059], [0065], [0071]-[0082], [0087]-[0089], and [0090]-[0106] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a sensing layer along with a processor that together sense at least a finger contact (i.e., touch) on a display having a touch-sensitive screen and checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of the user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists based on the detected signature then the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted, according to dimensions of the display, to the detected signature, and wherein the processor detects, records and stores relative position and sizes of fingers as a signature for future reference)).
Regarding claim 38, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to reconfigure the virtual input device by changing a button or key layout of the virtual input device (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0081] of Bozzini teaches for example, if a default virtual keyboard, such as the default virtual keyboard 710 in FIG. 7, is displayed, the processor 20 adjusts the default virtual keyboard 710 to a wider and larger virtual keyboard 810 as the first virtual keyboard, as shown in FIG. 8 for bigger hands. For smaller hands, the processor 20 may shorten the virtual keyboard 710 to a narrower and smaller virtual keyboard 910, as shown in FIG. 9. In effect, the processor 20 adapts the default virtual keyboard 710 to produce the first virtual keyboard, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0080], [0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of having a wider or narrow configuration of keys in the displayed keyboard and capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Regarding claim 40, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to reconfigure the virtual input device by changing a size or shape of the virtual input device (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0081] of Bozzini teaches for example, if a default virtual keyboard, such as the default virtual keyboard 710 in FIG. 7, is displayed, the processor 20 adjusts the default virtual keyboard 710 to a wider and larger virtual keyboard 810 as the first virtual keyboard, as shown in FIG. 8 for bigger hands; for smaller hands, the processor 20 may shorten the virtual keyboard 710 to a narrower and smaller virtual keyboard 910, as shown in FIG. 9; and in effect, the processor 20 adapts the default virtual keyboard 710 to produce the first virtual keyboard, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0080], [0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of having a wider or narrow configuration of keys in the displayed keyboard and capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Regarding claim 41, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to reconfigure the virtual input device by changing a spatial location of the virtual input device relative to the user (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0081] of Bozzini teaches for example, if a default virtual keyboard, such as the default virtual keyboard 710 in FIG. 7, is displayed, the processor 20 adjusts the default virtual keyboard 710 to a wider and larger virtual keyboard 810 as the first virtual keyboard, as shown in FIG. 8 for bigger hands; for smaller hands, the processor 20 may shorten the virtual keyboard 710 to a narrower and smaller virtual keyboard 910, as shown in FIG. 9; and in effect, the processor 20 adapts the default virtual keyboard 710 to produce the first virtual keyboard, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0080], [0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of having a wider or narrow configuration of keys in the displayed keyboard and capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Regarding claim 42, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the processing circuitry is configured to reconfigure the virtual input device by changing a setting of the virtual input device in stepwise fashion, going from an initial setting to a final setting via at least one intermediate setting (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0071] of Bozzini teaches according to the principles of another invention, a virtual keyboard can be adapted to fit the width of the user's hands and fingers; FIG. 6 illustrates a process 600 of dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard; and for purposes of example and explanation only, the steps of FIG. 6 may be explained hereinafter with specific reference to the exemplary embodiments of FIGS. 1-3 described above and other figures described later, and See also at least paragraphs[0072]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of having a wider or narrow configuration of keys in the displayed keyboard and capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Regarding claim 43, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the virtual input device is any of: a virtual keyboard, a virtual computer mouse, a virtual remote controller, a virtual gaming controller (100 FIGS. 1-2, paragraph[0020] of Creager teaches FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a virtual input computing system (200) for processing data obtained from the virtual keyboard (100) of FIG. 1, according to one example of the principles described herein; the virtual input computing system (200) may be incorporated into the pad (101) of the virtual keyboard (100), may be a coupled to the virtual keyboard (100), may be a standalone computing device, or may be incorporated into a computing device to which, the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled; and in the example where the virtual input computing system (200) is incorporated into a computing device to which the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled, the various computing elements and resources provided by the virtual input computing system (200) may be part of the computing device, and the modules comprising executable program code used in the implementation of the virtual keyboard (100) and its associated functions may be stored within a data storage device of the computing device, and See also at least paragraphs[0028]-[0036], [0042]-[0043], and [0048]-[0050] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a virtual input computing system for processing data obtained from a virtual keyboard, and to orient keys and display keystrokes associated with hand movements of a user)).
Regarding claim 46, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, wherein the control device is part of, or integrated with, a communication device (200, 100 FIGS. 1-2, paragraph[0061] of Creager teaches in this manner, the virtual keyboard (100) may be used to provide access control and security to any computing device; and these computing devices may include, for example, desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet computers, mobile phone devices, as well as objects or devices that user computing devices such as vehicles, automated teller machines (ATMs), buildings, musical instruments such as keyboards, checkout stands at retail stores, among many other devices and objects, and See also at least paragraphs[0020], [0027]-[0036], [0042]-[0043], and [0048]-[0050] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches the virtual input computing system having hardware adapters that provide an interface to a display device that includes a mobile device having a screen)).
Regarding claim 47, Creager teaches a system comprising: a user interface device comprising a projection module configured to project a virtual input device for use by a user (200 and 209; 100 FIGS. 1-2, paragraph[0020] of Creager teaches FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a virtual input computing system (200) for processing data obtained from the virtual keyboard (100) of FIG. 1, according to one example of the principles described herein; the virtual input computing system (200) may be incorporated into the pad (101) of the virtual keyboard (100), may be a coupled to the virtual keyboard (100), may be a standalone computing device, or may be incorporated into a computing device to which, the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled; and in the example where the virtual input computing system (200) is incorporated into a computing device to which the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled, the various computing elements and resources provided by the virtual input computing system (200) may be part of the computing device, and the modules comprising executable program code used in the implementation of the virtual keyboard (100) and its associated functions may be stored within a data storage device of the computing device, and See also at least paragraphs[0028]-[0036], [0042]-[0043], [0048]-[0050], and [0061] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a pad that includes a virtual input computing system for processing data obtained from a virtual keyboard, and to orient keys and display keystrokes associated with hand movements of a user, wherein the virtual input computing system connects the pad to a display device that uses a projection system to project an image of a keyboard on the pad)) and a sensor configured to obtain posture information indicating a posture of the user during interaction with the virtual input device; and a control device operatively connected to the user interface device and configured to: determine whether the posture satisfies an ergonomic criterion by determining whether a deviation between the posture and a predefined posture model represented by reference ergonomic data is within an acceptable range associated with the predefined posture model, the predefined posture model representing an ergonomically sound posture or an ergonomically poor posture; and responsive to determining that the posture fails to satisfy the ergonomic criterion, (102, 201 FIGS. 1-2, and 5, paragraph[0059] of Creager teaches the method (500) of FIG. 5 may continue by the processor (201) executing the security module (240) to determine (block 503) if the initial hand characteristics match a number of hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity such as the keystroke identity defined and stored at blocks 303 and 304 of FIG. 3; in one example, the initial hand characteristics may be compared to the keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into the computing device; in this example, a user who is authorized to access the computer, but is not the current user of the computer may still be denied access; in another example, the processor (201) may compare the initial hand characteristics to the keystroke identity of a number of users; if the initial hand characteristics match hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity (block 503, determination YES), then access to the computing device may be allowed; the method (500) may loop back to block 501 to ensure that every time a user's hands are detected, that this security measure may be performed; the hand characteristics compared at block 503 may include, hand movements, hand sizes, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, tissue density of the user's hands and fingers (110), palm prints, fingerprints, among many other characteristics of the user's hands and fingers as detected by the sensing devices (102), or combinations thereof, and See also at least paragraphs[0013]-[0014], [0020], [0022], [0036], [0038], [0044], [0048], [0050], [0058], [0060], and [0063]-[0064] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a processor for executing a module to determine characteristics of hand, wherein the hand characteristics include at least hand movements, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, wherein the virtual keyboard is calibrated while demonstrating keystrokes on the virtual keyboard, wherein determining the hand posturing from outset of the user using the virtual keyboard within a detection range is based on detection by sensing devices detecting interaction by the user, and wherein processor determines whether hand characteristics match or does not match a stored keystroke identity, for increasing comfort and utility, by comparing initial hand characteristic to a keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into a computing device connected to the virtual keyboard)); but does not expressly teach reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion.
However, Bozzini teaches reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Furthermore, Creager and Bozzini are considered to be analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to a keyboard, and forming a keyboard that is a virtual keyboard suitable for a particular user. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Creager based on Bozzini to reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion. One reason for the modification as taught by Bozzini is to have an apparatus for presenting a virtual keyboard with some keys partially or fully extend beyond the screen, dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard to a particular typing habits of a user, and allowing a user to customize a keyboard layout including adding/deleting keys and changing key positions (paragraph[0002] of Bozzini).
Regarding claim 48, Creager teaches a method of reconfiguring a virtual input device provided for use by a user (100 FIGS. 1-2, and 3 paragraph[0020] of Creager teaches FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a virtual input computing system (200) for processing data obtained from the virtual keyboard (100) of FIG. 1, according to one example of the principles described herein; the virtual input computing system (200) may be incorporated into the pad (101) of the virtual keyboard (100), may be a coupled to the virtual keyboard (100), may be a standalone computing device, or may be incorporated into a computing device to which, the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled; and in the example where the virtual input computing system (200) is incorporated into a computing device to which the virtual keyboard (100) is communicatively coupled, the various computing elements and resources provided by the virtual input computing system (200) may be part of the computing device, and the modules comprising executable program code used in the implementation of the virtual keyboard (100) and its associated functions may be stored within a data storage device of the computing device, and See also at least paragraphs[0028]-[0036], [0042]-[0043], [0048]-[0050], and [0061] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a virtual input computing system and method for processing data obtained from a virtual keyboard of a user, and to orient keys and display keystrokes associated with hand movements of a user)), the method being performed by a control device and comprising: obtaining information from a sensor, the posture information indicated a posture of the user whilst interacting with the virtual input device; determining whether the posture of the user satisfies an ergonomic criterion by determining whether a deviation between the posture of the user and a predefined posture model represented in reference ergonomic data falls within an acceptable range associated with the predefined posture model, the predefined posture representing an ergonomically sound posture or an ergonomically poor posture; and responsive to determining that the posture of the user fails to satisfy the ergonomic criterion, (101, 102 FIGS. 1-2, and 5, paragraph[0059] of Creager teaches the method (500) of FIG. 5 may continue by the processor (201) executing the security module (240) to determine (block 503) if the initial hand characteristics match a number of hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity such as the keystroke identity defined and stored at blocks 303 and 304 of FIG. 3; in one example, the initial hand characteristics may be compared to the keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into the computing device; in this example, a user who is authorized to access the computer, but is not the current user of the computer may still be denied access; in another example, the processor (201) may compare the initial hand characteristics to the keystroke identity of a number of users; if the initial hand characteristics match hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity (block 503, determination YES), then access to the computing device may be allowed; the method (500) may loop back to block 501 to ensure that every time a user's hands are detected, that this security measure may be performed; the hand characteristics compared at block 503 may include, hand movements, hand sizes, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, tissue density of the user's hands and fingers (110), palm prints, fingerprints, among many other characteristics of the user's hands and fingers as detected by the sensing devices (102), or combinations thereof, and See also at least paragraphs[0013]-[0014], [0020], [0022], [0028]-[0036], [0038], [0042]-[0044], [0048]-[0050], [0058], [0060]-[0061], and [0063]-[0064] of Creager (i.e., Creager teaches a processor for executing a module to determine characteristics of hand, wherein the hand characteristics include at least hand movements, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, wherein the virtual keyboard is calibrated while demonstrating keystrokes on the virtual keyboard, wherein determining the hand posturing from outset of the user using the virtual keyboard within a detection range is based on detection by sensing devices detecting interaction by the user, and wherein processor determines whether hand characteristics match or does not match a stored keystroke identity, for increasing comfort and utility, by comparing initial hand characteristic to a keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into a computing device connected to the virtual keyboard)); but does not expressly teach reconfiguring the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion.
However, Bozzini teaches reconfiguring the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion (FIGS. 1-3, and 6-16, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini (i.e., Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature)).
Furthermore, Creager and Bozzini are considered to be analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to a keyboard, and forming a keyboard that is a virtual keyboard suitable for a particular user. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method of Creager based on Bozzini by reconfiguring the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion. One reason for the modification as taught by Bozzini is to have an apparatus for presenting a virtual keyboard with some keys partially or fully extend beyond the screen, dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard to a particular typing habits of a user, and allowing a user to customize a keyboard layout including adding/deleting keys and changing key positions (paragraph[0002] of Bozzini).
Claims 44-45 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Creager, in view of Bozzini, and Holland et al., U.S. Patent Application Publication 2022/0035439 A1 (hereinafter Holland).
Regarding claim 44, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, but do not expressly teach wherein the virtual input device is provided in an extended reality (XR) virtual environment.
However, Holland teaches wherein the virtual input device is provided in an extended reality (XR) virtual environment (FIGS. 1-10, paragraph[0046] of Holland teaches for example, in the virtual keyboard example above, the position, order, size, and/or configuration of the virtual keyboard and/or keys on the virtual keyboard can be modified or randomized when rendered to the user to prevent other users in the physical environment from inferring key locations or typed data; the user can see the virtual keyboard through an XR device (e.g., a head-mounted display, AR glasses, etc.), but other users or devices will not be able to infer or understand the configuration of the virtual keyboard or the location of specific keys in the virtual keyboard; and accordingly, the other users will not be able to infer or understand the user's interactions with the virtual keyboard to potentially infer the information entered by the user through the virtual keyboard, even if the users are also using an XR device and engaged in the same XR experience as the user or otherwise capable of seeing the user's movements corresponding to the user's interactions, and See also at least paragraphs[0036]-[0037], [0039], [0043], [0045], and [0057] of Holland (i.e., Holland teaches an XR experience, via an XR device, that includes an XR environment wherein a user is utilizing a virtual keyboard in a manner that prevents other users in the physical environment from inferring key locations)).
Furthermore, Creager, Bozzini, and Holland are considered to be analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to a keyboard, and forming a keyboard that is a virtual keyboard suitable for a particular user. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Creager based on Bozzini and Holland wherein the virtual input device is provided in an extended reality (XR) virtual environment. One reason for the modification as taught by Bozzini is to have an apparatus for presenting a virtual keyboard with some keys partially or fully extend beyond the screen, dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard to a particular typing habits of a user, and allowing a user to customize a keyboard layout including adding/deleting keys and changing key positions (paragraph[0002] of Bozzini). Another reason for the modification as taught by Holland is to obfuscate virtual control interfaces in extended reality and other applications (paragraph[0001] of Holland). The same motivation and rationale to combine for claim 44 mentioned above, in light of corresponding statement of grounds of rejection, applies to each claim mentioned in the corresponding statement of grounds of rejection.
Regarding claim 45, Creager and Bozzini teach the control device according to claim 26, but do not expressly teach wherein the virtual input device is provided in an augmented reality (AR) virtual environment, a virtual reality (VR) virtual environment, or a mixed reality (MR) virtual environment.
However, Holland teaches wherein the virtual input device is provided in an augmented reality (AR) virtual environment, a virtual reality (VR) virtual environment, or a mixed reality (MR) virtual environment (FIGS. 1-10, paragraph[0046] of Holland teaches for example, in the virtual keyboard example above, the position, order, size, and/or configuration of the virtual keyboard and/or keys on the virtual keyboard can be modified or randomized when rendered to the user to prevent other users in the physical environment from inferring key locations or typed data; the user can see the virtual keyboard through an XR device (e.g., a head-mounted display, AR glasses, etc.), but other users or devices will not be able to infer or understand the configuration of the virtual keyboard or the location of specific keys in the virtual keyboard; and accordingly, the other users will not be able to infer or understand the user's interactions with the virtual keyboard to potentially infer the information entered by the user through the virtual keyboard, even if the users are also using an XR device and engaged in the same XR experience as the user or otherwise capable of seeing the user's movements corresponding to the user's interactions, and See also at least paragraphs[0036]-[0037], [0039], [0043], [0045], and [0057] of Holland (i.e., Holland teaches an XR experience that includes an XR environment wherein a user is utilizing a virtual keyboard in a manner that prevents other users in the physical environment from inferring key locations)).
Potentially Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 29 and 35 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome objection(s) indicated above, and if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims, because for each of claims 29 and 35 the prior art references of record do not teach the combination of all element limitations as presently claimed.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed September 17, 2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. The following is a brief summary of Applicant’s arguments:
In regard to currently amended claim 26, Applicants submitted that the combination of prior art of record does not disclose the following limitations: “determine whether the posture of the user satisfies an ergonomic criterion by determining whether a deviation between the posture of the user and a predefined posture model represented in reference ergonomic data falls within an acceptable range associated with the predefined posture model, wherein the predefined posture model represents an ergonomically sound posture or an ergonomically poor posture; and in response to determining that the posture of the user fails to satisfy the ergonomic criterion, reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion”.
In regard to currently amended claim 47, Applicants submitted that the combination of prior art of record does not disclose the following limitations: “determine whether the posture satisfies an ergonomic criterion by determining whether a deviation between the posture and a predefined posture model represented by reference ergonomic data is within an acceptable range associated with the predefined posture model, the predefined posture model representing an ergonomically sound posture or an ergonomically poor posture; and responsive to determining that the posture fails to satisfy the ergonomic criterion, reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion”.
In regard to currently amended claim 48, Applicants submitted that the combination of prior art of record does not disclose the following limitations: “determining whether the posture of the user satisfies an ergonomic criterion by determining whether a deviation between the posture of the user and a predefined posture model represented in reference ergonomic data falls within an acceptable range associated with the predefined posture model, the predefined posture representing an ergonomically sound posture or an ergonomically poor posture; and responsive to determining that the posture of the user fails to satisfy the ergonomic criterion, reconfiguring the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion”.
Examiner respectfully disagrees. In regard to the arguments ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ summarized above paragraph[0059] of Creager teaches the method (500) of FIG. 5 may continue by the processor (201) executing the security module (240) to determine (block 503) if the initial hand characteristics match a number of hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity such as the keystroke identity defined and stored at blocks 303 and 304 of FIG. 3; in one example, the initial hand characteristics may be compared to the keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into the computing device; in this example, a user who is authorized to access the computer, but is not the current user of the computer may still be denied access; in another example, the processor (201) may compare the initial hand characteristics to the keystroke identity of a number of users; if the initial hand characteristics match hand characteristics defined by a keystroke identity (block 503, determination YES), then access to the computing device may be allowed; the method (500) may loop back to block 501 to ensure that every time a user's hands are detected, that this security measure may be performed; the hand characteristics compared at block 503 may include, hand movements, hand sizes, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, tissue density of the user's hands and fingers (110), palm prints, fingerprints, among many other characteristics of the user's hands and fingers as detected by the sensing devices (102), or combinations thereof, and See also at least paragraphs[0013]-[0014], [0020], [0022], [0036], [0038], [0044], [0048], [0050], [0058], [0060], and [0063]-[0064] of Creager.
Thus, to still further clarify, Creager teaches a processor for executing a module to determine characteristics of hand, wherein the hand characteristics include at least hand movements, hand posturing, hand positioning, and keystroke style, wherein the virtual keyboard is calibrated while demonstrating keystrokes on the virtual keyboard, wherein determining the hand posturing from outset of the user using the virtual keyboard within a detection range is based on detection by sensing devices detecting interaction by the user, and wherein processor determines whether hand characteristics match or does not match a stored keystroke identity, for increasing comfort and utility, by comparing initial hand characteristic to a keystroke identity of an individual currently logged into a computing device connected to the virtual keyboard.
In addition, paragraph[0078] of Bozzini teaches at step 610, the processor 20 checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with the detected signature in the memory 30; if the corresponding virtual keyboard exists in the memory 30, the processor 20 at step 615 retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from the memory 30 and displays the corresponding virtual keyboard on the screen 310; this corresponding virtual keyboard should be an adapted keyboard produced previously with respect to this particular signature; if the default virtual keyboard 710 is displayed, the default virtual keyboard 710 is replaced by the corresponding virtual keyboard; and text 440 in FIG. 7 is entered by a user through the use of the adapted virtual key board, and See also at least paragraphs[0071]-[0077], [0079]-[0082], and [0087]-[0099] of Bozzini.
Thus, to still further clarify, Bozzini teaches a processor checks whether there is a corresponding virtual keyboard associated with a detected signature, which is a matching depiction of a user based on sizes and positions of touches, representing fingers of a user wherein if a corresponding virtual keyboard exists the processor retrieves the corresponding virtual keyboard from memory and displays the virtual keyboard on a screen, and wherein if no corresponding virtual keyboard exists in memory the processor produces a first virtual keyboard matching the detected signature and displays the first virtual keyboard that is capable of suggesting to the user to start using the first virtual keyboard to enter data in a manner that conforms with the first virtual keyboard that is adapted to the detected signature.
Furthermore, as mentioned above Creager and Bozzini are considered to be analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to a keyboard, and forming a keyboard that is a virtual keyboard suitable for a particular user. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system of Creager based on Bozzini to reconfigure the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion. One reason for the modification as taught by Bozzini is to have an apparatus for presenting a virtual keyboard with some keys partially or fully extend beyond the screen, dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard to a particular typing habits of a user, and allowing a user to customize a keyboard layout including adding/deleting keys and changing key positions (paragraph[0002] of Bozzini). The same motivation and rationale to combine for claim 26 mentioned above applies to all corresponding dependent claims mentioned in corresponding statement of grounds of rejection.
Still furthermore, as mentioned above, Creager and Bozzini are considered to be analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor with respect to a keyboard, and forming a keyboard that is a virtual keyboard suitable for a particular user. Therefore, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to modify the system and method of Creager based on Bozzini by reconfiguring the virtual input device based on the deviation, such that subsequent interaction by the user with the reconfigured virtual input device promotes adjustment of the posture of the user toward satisfaction of the ergonomic criterion. One reason for the modification as taught by Bozzini is to have an apparatus for presenting a virtual keyboard with some keys partially or fully extend beyond the screen, dynamically adapting a virtual keyboard to a particular typing habits of a user, and allowing a user to customize a keyboard layout including adding/deleting keys and changing key positions (paragraph[0002] of Bozzini).
Also, in regard to independent claims 26, 47, and 48 Applicant submitted that similar arguments apply to respective dependent claims. Therefore, the Examiner’s response in regard to arguments ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ summarized above, also applies to the respective dependent claims.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ABDUL-SAMAD A ADEDIRAN whose telephone number is (571)272-3128. The examiner can normally be reached Monday through Thursday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Amr Awad can be reached at 571-272-7764. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/ABDUL-SAMAD A ADEDIRAN/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2621
Prosecution Insights